INFOGRAPHIC: The Shocking Allegations of Mass Vote Fraud Made by Sidney Powell in Georgia
So easy to consume, even Democrats can understand...
Posted on 11/27/2020 9:53:45 AM PST by Alter Kaker
Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy. Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof.
We have neither here. The Trump Presidential Campaign asserts that Pennsylvania’s 2020 election was unfair. But as lawyer Rudolph Giuliani stressed, the Campaign “doesn’t plead fraud. . . . [T]his is not a fraud case.” Instead, it objects that Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State and some counties restricted poll watchers and let voters fix technical defects in their mail-in ballots. It offers nothing more.
This case is not about whether those claims are true. Rather, the Campaign appeals on a very narrow ground: whether the District Court abused its discretion in not letting the Campaign amend its complaint a second time. It did not. Most of the claims in the Second Amended Complaint boil down to issues of state law. But Pennsylvania law is willing to overlook many technical defects. It favors counting votes as long as there is no fraud. Indeed, the Campaign has already litigated and lost many of these issues in state courts.
The Campaign tries to repackage these state-law claims as unconstitutional discrimination. Yet its allegations are vague and conclusory. It never alleges that anyone treated the Trump campaign or Trump votes worse than it treated the Biden campaign or Biden votes. And federal law does not require poll watchers or specify how they may observe. It also says nothing about curing technical state-law errors in ballots. Each of these defects is fatal, and the proposed Second Amended Complaint does not fix them. So the District Court properly denied leave to amend again.
Nor does the Campaign deserve an injunction to undo Pennsylvania’s certification of its votes. The Campaign’s claims have no merit. The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters. Plus, tossing out millions of mail-in ballots would be drastic and unprecedented, disenfranchising a huge swath of the electorate and upsetting all down-ballot races too. That remedy would be grossly disproportionate to the procedural challenges raised. So we deny the motion for an injunction pending appeal.
What everyone is overlooking is that since the hearing in PA on last Wednesday, they are working on action in the PA legislature that will void the certification and let them send the electors they choose to the electoral college, or void the state election altogether. Neither one of these actions depend upon a signature from the rat governor or the secretary of state.
The case that is advancing in PA was brought not by Team Trump, but by a couple of PA legislators.
So easy to consume, even Democrats can understand...
The fix is in folks. Swamp rats saving their skins and enriching themselves to the detriment of our nation. All of them.
Yep. The stolen election is just the latest chapter is the now 4 year old bipartisan coup against POTUS.
It is my understanding that the USSC resolves difference of opinion between the circuits. I there are all wins or all losses, It does not go the to USSC.
Perhaps they are simply trying to fast track this to SCOTUS?
Doug Ross did a great job on this.
Don't be so dramatic.
There is a remedy, it's explicitly spelled out in Article II and Amendment XII, had it been used in 2000 instead of the absurd anti-constitutional Judicial Branch intervention in Bush v. Gore everyone would be familiar with it now.
The new Congress assembles in Joint Session to count the (sealed) electoral votes on January 6, 2021. This is, by the way, the first minute, hour, and day when Electoral Votes become official.
It is also the Constitutionally correct forum to dispute Electoral Votes and the only forum with the authourity to resolve disputes over their validity.
It only takes four justices to grant certiorari ... so the fact that there is four conservative justices without Roberts makes me thing that if there is something that percolates that high, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavenaugh will have four votes among the five to green light the hearing
The question then is will it be on the rocket docket (one would think they would have to take it immediately) and hear the case. Lots and lots of variables thus far.
While you're right that's usually how it works, it doesn't have to work that way - the Supreme Court *can* take appeals without a circuit split. I wouldn't hold my breath - but it can happen.
They don’t want court packing either, and that is surely what will happen if the dems get away with this. I would like to think that they are interested in truth and justice, as I think some of them are, but even the activist judges have to look out for themselves. I would not be surprised if we saw some 9-0 decisions.
I would. Court packing is a red meat GOTV issue for both parties. The fact is the Dems have no need for it. AZ & GA steadily shifting blue show the Dems are winning the demographic battle. All they have to do is stay on this track for a few elections and it is over. It’s the GOP and Team America that need a game changer. And electing more RINOs isn’t it.
There is process. The next will be appeal en back to the third circuit. Thereafter it can be appealed to the USSC to grant certiorari.
I doubt it. I don’t think the SC will take the case, there is no reason for them to take the case. Sounds like Rudy blew it.
Did Giuliani actually say there was no fraud, or was it that he did not argue fraud in this particular case?
Its not that easy. The Supreme Court does not have primary jurisdiction on this question (there are very few issues in which it does have primary jurisdiction). Thus, the process has to wind its way through the federal court system.
They are playing chess... they are playing for a checkmate in the least amount of moves.
They’re playing a weak hand the best they can. The DOJ has no interest in gathering facts regarding this stolen election. President Trump’s own party has been at best AWOL and at worst aiding and abetting the steal. I wish it was different but it is what it is.
Correct!
These 3 judges KNEW that 5 minutes after they spoke ANYTHING an appeal would be emailed to the Supreme Court by whichever side lost so they were not about to disappoint their Liberal/Marxist/Socialist pals with a vote to support Trump. Doing so would have probably got their house burned down in Pennsylvania.
I listened to the full 3 hour hearing. The EVIDENCE is overwhelming.
Kamala Harris had a rally in Las Vegas where nobody, NOBODY, showed up, but the Biden Harris ticket received 80,000,000 votes?
Yeah.....
Sure....
Our judges need to be fumigated.
Why did the three judge panel waste so many words when all they had to say never Trump.
They can’t hide behind words the MSM try it and it never works.
I do not believe there is an opinion of the court does not grant cert. It just lets stand the lower court on its merits.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.